I too think Walsh is a decent guy and well-intentioned. I did not vote for him this time and it was a difficult choice. His opponent really rubbed me the wrong way. But he had energy.

Walsh may have been around too long and he's too tired and too complacent.

I'm not a war monger but once in a while you need to prove that you are willing to commit ground troops and strategically Iraq is the right choice in which to make a statement because you don't want to do it in terrain like Iran.

Iraq is wide open territory and it is to a degree more manageable. I feel we have to be in Iraq and although it is a shame to lose 2,900 people and counting sometimes it is necessary.

I just learned that Little Falls, NY lost about 8% of its population in the Civil War. The US in this war has lost 1/1000th of 1% So you need to put the bigger picture in perspective. It is disturbing how we are losing people to snipers and roadside bombs but what about heart disease and diabetes?

Our healthcare system is killing hundreds of times more people by pricing people out of the ability to get proper care. And the money that is spent is crippling our economy.

If people are voting Walsh out because of Iraq, then I think they have the wrong reasons.

Mike Franklin
respond at skirst@syracuse.com or on the forum
Mike Franklin